Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tobe: I have just started to play CM, great game!! I do have a couple questions though: When moving a whole group of guys by double clicking on their leader and giving a destination, sometime the leader gets far ahead and certain guys move along too slowly and get sepparated. Is there any way to get your men to stay in a tight formation, like all moving a slow as the slowest man?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In real battles, units are given phase lines for regrouping and gathering laggards , checking the situation etc. Usually there would be at least two phase lines before the actual attack began, one for regrouping, and one for a `starting`line for the assault. A game like this with a limited time does not model this very well. However you will find that if yu manage to keep your platoons together, you will have much more success; it is often a tough call whether to continue an attack with dispersed units against a disorganized enemy or to wait and risk the defence solidifying. In bocage warfare, the German standard operating procedure was that `standard`methods must be foregone in favor of improvisation to expoit superior German fighting ability against enemy weaknesses. Henri Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Col. Klotz: Now there are not just maps on the site, but scenarios as well. Three SL/ASL scenarios submitted yesterday are up for some fighting, real good ones as well. Even more are on the way. Two Squad Leader classics: # 7 "The Bitche Salient" # 8 "Buchholz Station"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When I press the download button, I get a new window with gibberish ; if I drag the download button to the desktop, I get an alias . How do I download these files henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JTMauney: That said, I've a question for the other players, here: is it just me, or is the AI ridiculously easy to beat? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, despite your modesty, it sounds like you have the tactics down pat , and it sound to me like you need to play a pbem game against Fionn Boy, would I like to read the AAR to that one! Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by der Bob: Gentlemen (and Ladies?): I haven't yet played as the Brits, but it did seem a bit odd that his lone reinforcement--a 75mm Sherman--arrived on the last turn of the game (turn 23), and didn't even take any orders to move. It just sat there for one turn and then it was all over except the notes of "Deutschland Uber Alles" wafting around the burning remains of the destroyed town. Has anyone else played this yet, and if so, what is their opinion of the playbalance? der Bob<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I haven't played this scenario , but take the editor and check out the probability for arrival of the reinforcements. I have seen it as low as 5%, in which case there is a 60% chance that the reinforcements will not have arrived 10 moves after the first possible move. Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: Henri, Just a little friendly advice: If you are going to say "No spoilers" in your thread topic, then you need to delete the reference to xxxxx or yyyyy in your post. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks for the advice, but I don't understand why mentioning a xxxxx and a yyyyy in a scenario that has dozens of vehicles for both sides and that lasts 75 moves is a spoiler If I'm wrong, could someone "official" enlighten me as to what exactly are the standards for spoilers on this forum (added later: I have removed the references to specific units) [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GI Tom: BTS, do you think you can make it where a little thingy pops up on the screen that says "Youve been playing for too long, please take a break and come back when your mind is in the game". ?? This way when we do stupid things due to long play times, it can enhance our playing experience even more. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually some years ago, thre was an addon for the Mac where a Moose that would pop up on the screen every once in a while and make unwelcome remarks such as "Are you sleeping?..." or "Maybe you should go to bed!...". Sound like you need a Mac Henri

Thanks to all who responded; it appears that a fighting retreat is hard to do without smoke or building cover. I would like to hear how some are doing in situations like "Fear in the Fog", where the US is likely to be hit in the flank and where an orderly fighting retreat towards friendly units through mostly scattered trees and fog might be a good option. Henri

Hey, at lunch I changed the CM resolution to 1280x1078 from 1078x???, by throwing away the prefs file and changing the desktop resolution (otherwise it won't work), and I noticed that in the All or Nothing scenario, I could hear thunder, whereas I can't remember hearing thunder when playing that scenario at the lower reesolution. Am I supposed to see lightning too? (God it looks good at that resolution...). . But hey, I don't want to run my desktop at 1280x1078 I have a PIII 667/256 mb with a TNT2/32 bit card. Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jadayne: Another quick question, since I know you guys are out there. Is there a thread on this forum explaining the various strengths and weaknesses of the german infantry units? For instance, in terms of CM, are the security forces better for certain types of terrain? How about fuseliers, SS, etc.? I'm afraid my knowledge of German infantry is lacking and there's too many threads involving infantry to sort through them all. If anyone can give a super quick rundown it would be appreciated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My understanding is that that in this game, the main difference is in the experience and level that the designer gives them (conscript, veteran, etc...). However there may be some differences of equipment among them. There is a good article on HOW to use infantry formations effectively on Thegamers web site. Henri

How does one go about removing one of his own posts? [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).]

WARNING: some thought that this message contained a spoiler (since removed), but I can`t edit the messages of other posters. You can read THIS message without risk, but read the following one at your own risk... I just posted the fifth and last AAR of my battle as the British with the All or Nothing scenario on the Usenet war-historical forum . This is a huge scenario (huge map and 75 moves :eek . Although this is a great game and a great scenario, playing it showed areas where the game could use some improvements . I spent much more time plotting movement in this game than I liked; in fact, I probably spent around 75% or more of the 10+ hours I played this scenario plotting movement along roads . Since it is raining hard throughout the scenario, vehicles must stay on roads as much as possible (I lost 8 or more vehicles through boggin down or throwing a track moving on the railroad). If one goes the route of the stone bridge as suggested in the scenario description, the road is some 5 km long , with a lot of turns, and there are a LOT of vehicles to move. As a result, I felt a strong need for an easier way to plot movement along roads for columns of vehicles. I could be wrong, but it shouldn't be too complicated to put in a "copy" command to clone one vehicle's movements onto another, or a "follow me on the road" command to a group of vehicles, which could reduce the movement plotting time for scenarios like this by a factor of ten or more . As an aside, since all fighting was done from 300 m or more away and mostly by tanks, the problem of tanks shooting at crews while bigger threats are ignored did not appear in this game - but of course I was playing the British . While I'm at it, let me briefly repeat another comment that I made earlier today on this forum (the tips one): I found in the Fear in the Fog scenario (which I haven't finished yet and for which I may post an AAR here if the spirit moves me),that it seems too difficult to carry out a flexible defence without the front-line units being annihilated . This is not to criticize the game -it's like a marriage, where it is necessary to recognize the flaws of the other party so that one can adjust to them ... Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).] [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).]

It seems to me that units retreating from combat find it too difficult (and are usually wiped out), so I am unable to put together a credible flexible defence , which the Germans were very good at. This may be partially due to the fact that visibility may be too easy in scattered trees. It seems to me that a unit five or ten meters deep in such terrain could easily make itself invisible if it wanted to, and be able to sneak out to the rear without much chance of being spotted and killed. Last night in the "Fear in the Fog" scenario, I tried to withdraw a platoon after it had ambushed and blunted the enemy advance , but every man was killed despite the fact that they were in scatted tree terrain and that there was heavy fog, and that the nearest enemy was 20 m or more away and that no machineguns were involved. Great fun, though, but being able to execute a flexible defence with only moderate casualties would be great Henri

I'm playing at 1078; note that if you want to change the resolution, you have to throw away the preferences file in the game folder. Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fd ski: Edited SPOILER !!!! X X X X X X X Just played All or nothing scenario as Brits.. what a blast...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I just finished my game as the British last night; I will post the fourth and last installment of my AAR with this scenario on the Usenet war-historical forum later today, and post some comments on the scenario in general here later. Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter: Guys, he threat value should diminish with time, say by 1 per second (again, or whatever). So for 40 seconds in this example, the 'hidden' threat from the firefly would constitute the greater threat and the Tiger would react to it as it's main target. This is plenty of time for the target to reemerge on the other side of the house, and for the Tiger to be still tracking it (although leading might beproblematic). If it hasn't re-emerged in 40s, then go ahead and target the distant Stuart.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nice idea, but it would alow a gamey tactic: a player wold have a Sherman stick its nose out from behind a building every minute or two, when the Tiger is looking the other way, then back up out of sight; thus the Tiger would never get a shot off. Actually I have seen something like this happen with the present version; with the Tiger's slow traverse, if enemy tanks are appearing for only brief periods crossing roads, running between buildings etc, the slow turret traverse of the Tiger is such that it just keeps moving its turret around and never shoots. A possibly good solution proposed on the Usenet forum is to allow the Tiger to "see" the enemy tank for some time after it disappears from sight, so that it "knows" that there is a hidden threat. Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Just keep in mind folks that EVERYTHING you ask for takes us time to put into the game. Nothing comes out of thin air. So since our time is limited, and there are about a million things to simulate, people should grasp onto reality hard and get priorities in line with reality. We could spend 2 months making some more vehicles that wouldn't be used all that often, and wouldn't add that much to the level of realism, or we could instead do something more important. Life is all about choices Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, oh how I long for the good old days of Panzerblitz when all German tanks were Tigers or Panthers and all tank cannons were 88 mm! Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris B: >>Better rotate. As of now the rotate rotates around a camera spot, but usually I want to circle around my focus. As it is now I always have to follow up a rotate with scrolling.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You can rotate around any point on the map: contrl-click on the point to move your viewpoint there, then rotate. Depending on the option you chose, you will rotate about the bottom center of the screen or about the point that you clicked on. Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurtz: And dont forget, they give the Tiger crews something to do during lulls in the fighting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Their most useful purpose is to serve as decoys to distract enemy Tigers while their own tanks sneak up on them. "Oh Yoo-hoo, Mr Tiger?.. Bet you can't catch me! Ha, you poor excuse for a German, you couldn't hit the side of a barn, I bet. Ten to one you can't catch me while I run through that open space "... Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-18-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lurker: Now if I could manage to find a tank with the speed of a Cromwell along with the armor and firepower of a King Tiger... Well, if I found this tank in Combat Mission I'd know that somebody managed to crack the unit data... Lurker<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Try a Crocodile (a Comet would do...): I had a JahdPanzer IV a km away knock off two Shermans with four shots while other tanks bounced four shells in a row off the JdPz. Then I brought up my Crocodile flame tank, and the JdPz bounced five shells off the beast before the Comet following up behind knocked off the JdPz with his first hit. Talk about a one-two punch... Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-18-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: IN a PBEM game I was palying, I had three half tracks get wiped in one turn strictly from small arms fire.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I guess you need better drivers, Jeff; in my present game, I have a halftrack driven by Jaques Villeneuve that I put on "fast" and zipped down the road and up a sideroad and back in order to recon the enemy positions. The halftrack came out unscathed despite being shot at by a variety of Germans, including one called Michael Schumacher... Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-18-2000).]

There is what appears to be a roadblock at the exit to the wooden bridge in the sccneario "All or Nothing". Henri

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The ft proceeded to dump all 9 squirts in the same spot. I would have ordered 1 or 2 max. Now he is a useless civilian for the rest of the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You could have given a couple of pause orders; of course, that would have meant that the FT would have waited 30 seconds before starting to squirt... Henri

OK, Fionn and anyone who's ionterested, here is my analysis of fionn's AAR on "The Sunken Lane" that I wrtote on the war-historical usenet forum a few days ago. Contains SPOILERS. --------------- Another very instructive AAR on Thegamers web site by Fionn. One can learn a lot from this Sunken Lane AAR, not only about Fionn's particular style of aggressive and psychological warfare (woe to him who plays Fionn as if he were playing a computer...), but about a number of other things. Before getting into my comments about the battle itself (based as usual on 100% hindsight), a few comments. This battle shows the usefulness of Sun Tzu's maxim "Know yourself and know your enemy"; although Fionn's opponent Bill was the designer of the scenario, Fionn used his thorough knowledge of infantry tactics in general, of the scenario itself and of Combat Mission's possibilities to the utmost advantage. Small details such as the knowledge that it is harder to damage an infantry unit on top of a ridge with HE than on the slope, that split German squads are weaker than the Allies' at close range but more powerful at long range, such as when it is better to split a squad, and many other factors are played upon by Fionn like a Maestro leading an orchestra. True, Bill made a number of mistakes, and failed to capitalize on Fionn's own mistakes, but the battle was carried out with brio, and despite the fact that he was the defender, Fionn kept the initiative throughout the battle and kept his opponent off balance the whole time, following the strategy maxim that to unhinge your opponent's mind is to unhinge his army. Being who he is, seeing that he was outnumbered 3:1 and that things would get worse, Fionn pulled a Rommel on the British (will they never learn?...) and decided to attack! It was a brilliant idea to catch his opponent off balance, and carried out most brilliantly. Bill did not expect this, and he made the mistake of not deploying his advancing units properly in case he were attacked, confident that Fionn would be on the defensive. For example, his right-wing platoon advanced in a full wedge formation unsupported by tanks, inappropriate for terrain propitious for ambushes. There is an interesting article (on Thegamers or the Wargamer site, I am not sure) on infantry positions, and the wedge position with three full platoons forward is not appropriate for such a situation: the leading platoon should have been split and deployed in such a way that when the leading element is ambushed, it can be supported quickly by the other elements, while the leading element retreats, and supporting tank or heavy weapons need to be following in such a way that they can be brought into play quickly. As it was, the leading British elements were practically annihilated, and Bill found himself in a situation where he continually had to react to Fionn's actions, instead of the other way around, since he was the attacker. If Bill had taken into account (from reading Fionn's earlier AARs) that in a situation like this Fionn was likely to go on the offensive, he could have deployed differently and possibly chewed up Fionn's over-ambitious plan. Othere mistakes such as Bill sending tanks ahead of the infantry in terrain with hidden positions wer ruthlessly exploited by Fionn. Although the battle is not quite over, it IS over for all practical purposes. In my view, Fionn's big strength in this battle in addition to his detailed knowledge of the units' capabilities (such as that the Firefly is inferior to the Sherman 75 against infantry) was his ability to guess what his opponent was thinking and to exploit it. When Fionn is fighting, the real battlefield is his opponent's mind, which leaves amateurs who play only the map in the dust wondering "Wha' hoppen'd?...". This is not to criticize Fionn's opponent Bill, who put up a good fight, but who was like a good expert chess club player playing a Grandmaster. Fionn is a true grandmaster of Combat Mission, and one will have to get up really early in the day to beat him... If you want to learn a lot about Combat Mission and about how to fight a battle, you should learn a lot from reading this AAR. If you only learn one thing, let it be the following: know your units, know their strenths and weaknesses, and know those of the enemy even better. And if you don't like to lose, don't play against Fionn... Henri

Fionn said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I haven't been able to receive Usenet messages since Thursday. Trust me to miss out on that ;(. Any chance of your reposting here.. Or I might use dejanews..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't have it here, but I can post it here from the office tomorrow. Henri

[qote]Has anyone else experienced Us atomic grenades. Justfinished playing a QB Germans vs US a Panther decided pit its self against A US Pl Hq at about 20 metres, the panther fired its main gunned 4 times + MGs no apparent damage, US HQ throw Grenade, dead tank! Thinking his was a bit odd replayed sequence another 4 times via auto save panther every time, gotta be something out of whack here. grenades aren't that good.